Talk:Yasser Arafat/Archive 8

Second Intifada
Yasser Arafat's widow Suha admitted that the late Palestinian leader premeditated the Second Intifada, in an interview with Dubai TV on early December 2012, according to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute.

“Immediately after the failure of the Camp David [negotiations], I met him in Paris upon his return.… Camp David had failed, and he said to me: ‘You should remain in Paris.’ I asked him why, and he said: ‘Because I am going to start an Intifada. They want me to betray the Palestinian cause. They want me to give up on our principles, and I will not do so,’” the research institute translated Suha as saying.

(Comment: The main article has a full section on the First Intifada, but the Second Intifada is only mentioned on a "by the way" basis: "After the September 2000 outbreak of the Second Intifada ..." This is wrong because it ignores that Arafat had started it, and minimize both the significance of the role of Arafat in the Intifada, and minimize the significance of the Intifada itself, in spite of its wide scope and strong virulence.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyjn (talk • contribs) 11:36, 29 December 2012‎ (UTC)

"Political corruption" instead of "Financial dealings"
Seeing as the section headlined "Financial dealings" deals solely with Arafat's political corruption (indeed, in financial terms only), I think it should be renamed accordingly. If you have any other suggestions for an appropriate headline, perhaps more delicate but certainly not as naive as the current one, I'll be happy to hear it. I'm leaving this question open for a few days before changing it. Shilton (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * "Financial dealings" was chosen as a neutral title a long time ago. The title you suggest is too blunt, but not inaccurate. I say we rename it "Allegations of corruption" to stay within WP:NPOV. Arafat always denied the wealth he had and the section is largely accusations. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * "Allegations of corruption" sounds good to me - it is definitely more accurate. Shilton (talk) 19:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Autopsy Results?
Anyone have any information on results of the YA autopsy? He apparently was exhumed in November but are there no results yet? I havent been able to find a reputable story posted since then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sephiroth storm (talk • contribs) 23:13, 11 January 2013‎ (UTC)
 * It will be probably be a few months before the results are found or announced. --Al Ameer son (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, is that common? Sephiroth storm (talk) 13:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure if that's common procedure or not, that's just what the sources say:, . This source says there should be results by this month while another says by March . I guess we'll just have to wait. --Al Ameer son (talk) 18:51, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Still no results? Nearly a year. Sephiroth storm (talk) 03:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

reports

 * What is the relevance to the newspapers Haaretz and The New York Times rejecting assassination reports. These papers are supposed to report news, not try to suppress it.203.184.41.226 (talk) 05:45, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you feel the cited sources are being misrepresented or are not reliable? - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Israeli newspaper and NY times are very pro Israeli, they are very biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.23.163.142 (talk) 14:10, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you the original poster 203.184.41.226? Also, you will need a specific allegation, with proof, of bias in the reference being used. Sephiroth storm (talk) 14:01, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

2004 Autopsy

 * According to Al Jazeera, reports of Arafat's widow refusing an autopsy in 2004 are incorrect. The French doctors did not offer one, and the widow did not request one (nor did the PA).  http://www.aljazeera.com/investigations/killing-arafat/myth-buster-killing-arafat-20131028194036387835.html 35.46.5.98 (talk) 22:32, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

"Revered by many Arabs"
I looked around on Google Scholar, Google Books, and Google News, and didn't find anything that wasn't attributable back to Wikipedia. Does anyone know if this quote can be sourced back to a specific person? Anonymous-232 (talk) 22:19, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know ("revered" seems questionable), the quote isn't sourced to the citation used. I restored the original cited wording that was there at the time of the article's FA promotion. --Al Ameer (talk) 18:55, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Radiological poisoning
To the editors of this article: the statement of 83% was NEVER made by the researchers; it is a fake from Al Jazeera as can be read here http://www.aljazeera.com/investigations/killing-arafat/qa-francois-bochud-arafat-report-2013117184743478799.html "The number that YOU (to Al Jazeera) obtained of 83 percent is actually a simple division of this six level scale. While this is explainable and understandable, this is not the way I would like to pronounce it. I don’t want to give a figure. I prefer to say “moderately support” because we do not have enough evidence to give a figure." nothing scientific.

Also it is completely wrong to write: "Most experts in forensics agreed that the results were consistent with Polonium, but not conclusive evidence thereof." Dave Barcley is not specialized in this matter at all and real experts explained it in the full investigation report in english at the end of this article http://philosemitismeblog.blogspot.be/2013/11/empoisonnement-darafat-le-rapport.html 94.111.124.171 (talk) 12:53, 20 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree about the 83%, though I wouldn't call it "fake". It is an unscientific attempt to quantify a non-numerical scale.  News organisations often do stuff like that due to their lack of scientific understanding. Zerotalk 23:52, 20 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, i'll try a corrective statement Savasorda (talk) 11:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

<<I am a forensic biologist with many years of experience and have been quoted in many of the recent articles about this case. It is accurate to say that most forensic scientists (that is, the ones I have spoken with) would agree that it is consistent with Polonium, but not conclusive. It is also accurate to say that there was not substantially higher levels of Polonium in most samples from the the tomb or artifacts. That is because, after 8 years, the Po-210 would have decayed to Pb. There was elevated Pb, however, which would be consistent with Po-210 poisoning. But there are other ways to have elevated Pb, as the report acknowledges. They attempted to rule these out, but it is just too long after the fact. These findings are suspicious, yes, but only suspicious, not conclusive. The truth might very well be lost forever due to radioactive decay.>> '' To the editors of this article:

Might I suggest in light of recent news that the following tag be added at the bottom of this page

Category:Victims of radiological poisoning

Sources: http://www.aljazeera.com/investigations/killing-arafat/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24838061 http://news.sky.com/story/1164820/yasser-arafat-tests-support-polonium-claims http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/06/yasser-arafat-poisoned-polonium-tests-scientists http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/palestinianauthority/10432349/PLO-calls-for-Yasser-Arafat-polonium-investigation.html


 * This is nothing more than Palestinian propaganda and incitement. The PLO refuses to release Arafat's medical records from the period preceding his death.  The levels of Polonium detected were within the range that one would expect in any set of bones.


 * Sources:

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4049/arafat-polonium-poisoning https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/commentaryanalysis/520151-was-arafat-really-poisoned http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/british-expert-says-its-highly-unlikely-arafat-was-poisoned-8929762.html http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-arafat-who-dunnit/ http://www.nature.com/news/no-firm-proof-arafat-was-poisoned-1.14130


 * The PLO and Hamas have been spreading the most scandalous lies as of late (The Mossad training snakes to chase Palestinians out of Jerusalem, Jews Poisoning Wells in Jerusalem, Jews planning on knocking down the Dome of the Rock and/or the Al-Aqsa mosque (a lie dating back to Haj Amin al-Husseini and used to instigate riots and pogroms), Jewish 'raids' by 'radical zionists' on the Temple mount, the 'Judaization' of Jerusalem). At a certain level, each individual claim is funny and easily debunked, but if we consider that there are _literally millions_ of people in the Muslim world who actually believe this garbage.  That Wikipedia would uncritically carry this kind of incitement and trash is a step too far, even considering that this article is a panegyric to an unrepentant terrorist and mass-murderer.


 * Where is the documentation showing that while Arafat publicly agreed in English to recognize the state of Israel, he told his followers in 1994 in arabic that it was not sincere and was merely a stepping stone to retake the whole of Israel? Where is the notice about his systematic violations of the Oslo accords and his return to violence before the ink was even dry on the accords? 174.44.174.192 (talk) 00:01, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

polonium poisoning, balance.
Most of the quotes in the wikipedia article cast doubt on the polonium poisoning hypothesis, but if I go to the sources, they tend to have more quotes favoring the hypothesis. For example, the NPR article from which the Lents quote is taken cites four experts: Hill, Goldberger, Kobilinsky, and Lents. The first three are cautiously favorable to the Swiss team's conclusion. But only Lents expresses doubt clearly and is the only one quoted in the wikipedia article. The part where Lents says that the results are consistent with polonium poisoning is also omitted. It looks to me like someone is selecting quotes here with an eye to creating a particular bias.Pcruce (talk) 20:31, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I added a quote, extended a quote, and better identified the source of the "experts disagree" claim. I think it now more accurately reflects the content of the sources used.Pcruce (talk) 20:46, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Misspelling of Mossad
In the article, there is one occurrence of Mosaad instead of Mossad.

Eleanorba (talk) 23:33, 8 December 2013 (UTC) Eleanor Batchelder Dec. 8, 2013

French investigation ruled out Polonium poisoning

 * The last sentence in the article disingenuously and falsely implies the French investigation suggested Arafat was killed by Polonium in Arafat's body, which is not at all what is claimed in the referenced Washington Times article (which cites only Suha Arafat's claims about the French investigation).
 * The truth is that the French investigation ruled out Polonium poisoning. See the reference below, and please correct this falsehood in the article, as the article is currently locked and not available for editing. Thank you.
 * http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/12/french-experts-rule-out-arafat-poisoning-2013123145211499109.html
 * JD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.253.72.26 (talk) 09:38, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2013
Theories About Cause of Death

(Separate paragraph)

On December 26, 2013, a team of Russian scientists released a report saying they had found no trace of radioactive poisoning — a finding that comes after the French report found traces of the radioactive isotope polonium. Vladimir Uiba, the head of the Federal Medical and Biological Agency, said that Arafat died of natural causes and the agency had no plans to conduct further tests.

Lesliegb2007 (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Done. Thank you. --PeaceNT (talk) 21:10, 13 January 2014 (UTC)


 * No, the French investigation ruled out Polonium poisoning, just like the Russian investigation, and this needs to be clearly stated in the article. See my comment below and the referenced article.
 * Suha Arafat put words into the mouth of the French investigators, which you are quoting as though it came directly from the French report itself. That would be a highly POV secondary source. The only relevant piece of information is what the French report actually concluded, which is that there was no Polonium poisoning and that Arafat died from natural causes, as was claimed in the original French report of 2004.
 * JD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.253.72.26 (talk) 09:51, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

French investigation found no trace of Polonium

 * The last sentence in the article disingenuously and falsely claims the French investigation found traces of Polonium in Arafat's body, which is not at all what is claimed in the referenced Washington Times article.
 * The truth is that the French investigation found no traces of Polonium. See the reference below, and please correct this falsehood in the article, as the article is currently locked and not available for editing. Thank you.
 * http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/12/french-experts-rule-out-arafat-poisoning-2013123145211499109.html
 * JD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.253.72.26 (talk) 10:05, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Incorrect. "At a press conference in Paris on Tuesday evening, Suha Arafat and her lawyer said the French report found similar levels of polonium 210 as the Swiss, but investigators in Paris came to different conclusions."

Death and Illness
His wife has claimed the reports she refused an autopsy are false. (Al Jezeera documentary on cause of death:title unknown) Jcunme (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Participation to the 1948 war
Does someone know a source for the fact that Arafat would have participated to the '48 war and more precisely for this:
 * Arafat fought alongside the Muslim Brotherhood, although he did not join the organization. He took part in combat in the Gaza area

My mind after looking for information in googlebooks is that he tried to enter Palestine but never succeeded... Does someone have more information ? Pluto2012 (talk) 11:51, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Lack of references in introduction
There is a serious lack of references in the first few paragraphs.

'Arafat spent much of his life committed to acts of terror against Israel in the name of Palestinian self-determination. Originally opposed to Israel's existence, he modified his position in 1988 when he accepted UN Security Council Resolution 242.'. According to whom?
 * References are not needed in the lead, because there should be no info there not found in the article, which already has citations. If unique info is found there, it should be moved to the article, or deleted. FunkMonk (talk) 19:18, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with top comment here, especially describing his life as dedicated to "acts of terror" makes the article non-neutral. There must be a citation, or it should be deleted and made neutral. BasicallyADoctor (talk) 06:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Edit to the lead
Please stop edit warring, with this edit. The fact that Arafat was considered a terrorist by Israel is already present in the lead. Adding this stuff again is blatantly violating WP:NPOV. Kingsindian &#9821;&#9818; 20:38, 6 October 2014 (UTC) --- Everyone against their invasion is a terrorist, just like the whole Palestinians are terrorists, so they must kill the children and take the land. Gonna add sources of my words after some time .. or after the whole world supporting Israel to kill the whole goddamn middle-east people .. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.68.143.203 (talk) 10:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Yasser Arafat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131020142835/http://www.laa.org/tours/thewar.htm to http://www.laa.org/tours/thewar.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:35, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Swiss forensic report on polonium-210 found in Mr. Arafat's remains
Dear Sir, Madam,

I miss in your article,where the topic is the illness and death of Arafat the mentioning of the swiss report of Mr Francois Bochud and his team of the forensic laboratory of the University of Lausanne. The Wiki story tells only about the French and the Russian conclusions.This way it does not seem to me an objective account here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Van Mokum (talk • contribs) 16:04, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2016
Change nationality to Egyptian. Born in Egypt yet Palestinian? Makes no sense.

Avi1231 (talk) 12:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: He does not have Egyptian citizenship. If you are born in a country like the UK or France, you are not automatically a citizen of that country; you are only a citizen if your parents are citizens (see jus sanguinis). Countries like the USA grant citizenship to everyone born in their territory (see jus soli). In the case of Egypt, Egypt only grants citizenship to people born in Egypt if their father was also an Egyptian citizen. In this case, Arafat's father was Palestinian so Egyptian nationality was not conferred. He is, instead, Palestinian.  st170e talk  12:50, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Arabic name
It doesn't look like the al-Qudwa part of his name is in the Arabic translation, why is that? -KaJunl (talk) 11:37, 7 July 2016 (UTC) KaJunl (talk) 11:37, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Adding quote to lede
The present lede has problems of WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE. For a man who is/was regarded as both a leader and an innovator of modern terrorism, the lede singularly profiles Arafat's peace efforts while Wikiwashing his terrorist history. The first use of the word "terrorism" is the last word in the lede, but associating it only that "Israelis described him as an unrepentant terrorist", in other words, that's only what Israelis feel/think.

I am adding the following line into the lede to give equal weight: As History's biography wrote, "For two decades the PLO launched bloody attacks on Israel, and Arafat gained a reputation as a ruthless terrorist".  Kamel Tebaast  18:34, 9 August 2016 (UTC)


 * No. Equal weight, the view of him as a leader of a resistance movement, and the leader of a terrorist group is in the final section. He wasn't an innovator in modern terrorism, most of the tactics there, from carbombing markets to hijacking planes, and massacres of civilians existed earlier, esp. with the Irgun and Lehi gangs. The first hijack of a civilian airliner to extract a deal was performed by Israel. Note that your edit, apart from repeating higher up in the lead a POV provided below, is also editorializing for one POV:
 * As History's biography wrote, "For two decades the PLO launched bloody attacks on Israel, and Arafat gained a reputation as a ruthless terrorist.'
 * I.e. one poor source (we have many Rs biographies of Arafat) states an opinion, and you, as editor, endorse it. So I am removing it.
 * One further point. Do not make a declaration per talk, and then make the edit, and then use the edit summary 'as per talk', as if some conversation had occurred. Make a proposition on the talk page and wait for someone, if anyone, to discuss its merits. If no one does in a day or two, then by all means you can use that gambit. But not simultaneously. Compare the leads of Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Ariel Sharon, all 3 terrorists at one time in their lives.Nishidani (talk) 21:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)


 * My comment that Arafat was an "innovator of modern terrorism" was contextual for the Talk page only. I'm not going to educate you further about his innovations. I'm not surprised that you discredit History as a source. In viewing your history, I believe you will discredit any source that states Arafat was a terrorist. I won't rebut your strawman arguments regarding Israel, Begin, Shamir, et al. Lastly, you have a habit of dictating how to edit on Wikipedia. I believe that I followed WP:BRD and the discussion can ensue here, as it has.  Kamel Tebaast  00:47, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * You have been there for 1 month and you write sentences such as "you have a habit of dictating how to edit on wikipedia".
 * Who are you the sock of ? Pluto2012 (talk) 09:00, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Really, it takes months to formulate an opinion? Try two interactions: above and here (among other places).  Kamel Tebaast  13:03, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Many have that impression of 2 editors here, Pluto. I've thought for some months at least 2 old hands have returned, personally, but I have no proof, and therefore my 'feel' for this is immaterial to wikipedian judgments. We really should just abstain from asserting what is, so far, just an impression. Hope all's well there. Cheers. Nishidani (talk) 10:07, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

people world wide
Look KT. You don't 'clarify' a lead that is limpid in its summation, esp by adding this stuff. people world wide think America is the greatest threat to peace;idem for Donald Trump; idem Israel. Check those articles. We don't put this into leads, and often not in articles either. Demonization is not acceptable here per WP:NPOV. Further attempts (this is your third try) to 'plant' this will be considered disruptive.Nishidani (talk) 18:43, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Firstly, I appreciate the "KT" moniker. Thank you. Regarding your points, that is your contention that this is "disruptive" and maybe other "people think" it as well. As the sentence presently reads: "The majority of the Palestinian people—regardless of political ideology or faction—viewed him as a heroic freedom fighter and martyr who symbolized the national aspirations of his people..." Really? Please explain how that works in the context and detail with your explanation above. In the end (literally), the sentence was a check and balance between two divergent opinions of Arafat. However, one (the Palestinian) was fully weighted while the other was a throw away phrase that, insidiously limited his role as an international terrorist by only bringing in the Israeli view. Either take out the "heroic freedom fighter and martyr" or we need to give more context and detail to his actions on the other side.  Kamel  Tebaast  19:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ")(POV 1)'The majority of the Palestinian people—regardless of political ideology or faction—viewed him as a heroic freedom fighter and martyr who symbolized the national aspirations of his people'(POV 2)while many Israelis have described him as an unrepentant terrorist"
 * The POVs are balanced. I thought about this before you raised it. The problem with an expansion of POV2 is that it would mean stating that many Israeli senior figures, from Rabin to Peres, signed peace agreements with him, and did not treat him as a terrorist after 1992, but underwrote that he was a political head of the Palestinians. I couldn't add that because it would only favour POV 1. It is true that many Israelis regard him as an unrepetent terrorist. The Israeli government did not hold that view. I will change 'many' to 'most' however, since I have a source for it.Nishidani (talk) 19:28, 11 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The fact that you changed something based on my original edit, would that not justify--at a minimum--that my edit was substantive in nature and therefore not "disruptive editing"? Although I have zero hope that you would admit to that, I do have hope that you can continue the discussion here and leave AE as it is.


 * The problem is that your equation is not properly weighted. What you call (POV 1) is actually five different thoughts: 1) "The majority of the Palestinian people" [NOTE: It really should be "Palestinians" not "the Palestinian people"] 2) (subset details) "regardless of political ideology or faction" 3) "viewed him as a heroic freedom fighter" 4) (added detail) and martyr", and 5) "who symbolized the national aspirations of his people". Your (POV 2) has two: 1) "while many Israelis", and 2) "described him as an unrepentant terrorist". Your sentence would have been neutral had it been constructed like this: "The majority of Palestinians view him as a heroic freedom fighter while most Israelis view him as an unrepentant terrorist." That is why it is laughable when you accuse me of POV-pushing by just trying to even the field.  Kamel Tebaast  00:29, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Let me see how you work here. I gave you a range of examples of wiki I/P biographies where, unlike this, there is simply no attempt at a so called POV balance. They dealt with Israeli leaders who had an extensive record for having engaged in terrorism. This sort of thing:-
 * "Sharon was considered the greatest field commander in Israel's history, and one of the country's greatest military strategists.[4] After his assault of the Sinai in the Six-Day War and his encirclement of the Egyptian Third Army in the Yom Kippur War, the Israeli public nicknamed him 'The King of Israel'."
 * How would you balance that? Nishidani (talk) 08:16, 12 August 2016 (UTC)


 * You're right. I didn't respond to your straw man attempts to balance Israeli leaders because that's not what is being discussed. Further, if any of them had 30 year careers of torture, murder, kidnapping, hijackings, and terrorism predominantly against civilians, as Arafat had, then, yes, that should not be in the last sentence of their lede, but in the first. You are credited with doing a brilliant job altering Arafat's history by Wikiwashing the facts of his life. Good for you.  Kamel Tebaast  08:32, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The use of 'strawman' in the I/P area was a great vogue among several editors for years: it was the default term for not answering anybody one disliked. I haven't seen it regularly for the last 2. Your last remark shows that you lack detachment and wish to skewer the subject of the article. I cited Sharon because as a boy:
 * "In units of thirty men, they would hit constantly at Arab villages, bridges and bases, as well as ambush the traffic between Arab villages and bases."
 * Had that group of 30 been 'Arab' it would be described as 'hit constantly Jewish villages, bridges and bases, as well as ambush the traffic between Jewish villages and bases,' and the implication would be wholly different.
 * at the Qibya massacre he superintended the murder of 69 Arab villagers after giving orders to his squad to execute "maximal killing and damage to property".
 * Had Arafat personally gone to a Jewish village ordering "maximal killing' and superintending the murder of 69 Jews, he would never have been a 'partner for peace'.
 * Sharon is considered the architect of the 1982 Lebanon War in which an 8th month truce with the PLO was broken on a shallow pretext, and 19,000 civilians died. Sharon was directly in command and did not order his troops, some metres away from the 3 day long massacre, to intervene (reports were dripping in throughout that period) in the Sabra and Shatila massacre. The Arabs called him 'the butcher of Beirut'.  There is no trace of the way anyone other than his admirers viewed him. There is no trace of the hatred that his memory evokes in many. That doesn't get me, for one, jumping onto the article lead to 'skewer' him.


 * I won't go into all the other details, but it would appear that the evidence of his active involvement in the murder of innocents is far stronger than for Arafat. That is not to exculpate Arafat. It is simply to note that how we describe these figures must be basically factual, by simply setting down the record, and not by trying to predetermine the outcome of a reader's reactions, as you have been trying to do here. It is a fact that Palestinians generally idealize Arafat, and a majority of Israelis hate him. It is a fact that Israelis lionize Sharon, and Palestinians think of him as a murderous butcher, who loved sticking his finger into the wounds of their memory, as he did at Al Aqsa, close to the commemoration of the Shatila massacre. We hsve a fair statement of Arafat's ambiguity in his lead, we have a one-sided apotheosis of Ariel Sharon in his lead.   Doesn't this worry you? Nishidani (talk) 10:48, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * What would worry me more is if you were to add factually sourced material in a NPOV effort to his lede, and editors stopped you because of their personal slant.  Kamel Tebaast  15:59, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no personal 'slant' re Arafat, other than believing there were far more capable, less corrupt men in the ranks, but they were all assassinated. That's the way history works in that region - the sane are sidelined, and the crooks prevail.Nishidani (talk) 16:42, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Yasser Arafat - Profession CIVIL ENGINEER
It is ironic that Arafat engineered massacres - nothing CIVIL about him — Preceding unsigned comment added by Al.Qudsi (talk • contribs) 06:59, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

faulty and unreliable information from Luis Lema of Le Temps (Switserland)
This text:
 * According to the Swiss expert team (including notably experts in radio-chemistry, radio-physics and legal medicine), on a probability scale ranging from one to six, death by polonium poisoning is around five.[178]

is based on a texte of an article of Luis Lema in Le Temps.

It is even a falsification of what is written, because it is Luis Lema who puts this sentence in the mouth of the Swiss team without their agreement, whereas the Swiss team itself published a scientific document explaining why there isn't any probabilistic data available

http://www.chuv.ch/ira/ira-arafat-faq.pdf
 * Why did we use a Bayesian analysis and why doesn't the conclusion estimate the probability that Mr. Arafat was poisoned by polonium?

and


 * In this sense, these results do not then define the probability to which Yasser Arafat would have been poisoned by polonium

When a journalist writes such a stub, should not all references to his article(s) be withdrawn? Realitychecking (talk) 08:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * From what I understand, the Swiss did not give a probability number. The scale from 1 to 6 does not refer to probability, but refers to categories such as "definitely not:, "moderately probable, "definitely" and so on. Al Jazeera asked them if being 5 on the scale of 6 means 83% probability (5/6 of 100%), but the experts clarified that it does not. This is made clear in the text, as far as I can see. The cited text also does not say anything about probability, but only talks about the scale. The scale should perhaps be made explicit. Kingsindian &#9821; &#9818; 10:51, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I have rewritten the prose to be a bit more clear. Let me know if there are any issues. Kingsindian &#9821; &#9818; 11:03, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Tx. Yes, I saw. I have to think about it. May be this article should limit to the conclusions developped in the other one whereby it is now known that there was no real proof at all? I'll think about it. Realitychecking (talk) 20:37, 7 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Shouldn't this discussion and most of the edits first be in the primary article and that Talk page?  Kamel  Tebaast  21:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Yasser Arafat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.un.int/wcm/content/site/palestine/cache/offonce/pid/12354%3Bjsessionid%3D704B7796CCBC72ACC579828A2197F8B9
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/A238EC7A3E13EED18525624A007697EC
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://al-shabaka.org/sites/default/files/Khalil_PolicyBrief_MurphyToKissinger24Feb1976.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130819000000/http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/chronology/19941995.htm to http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/chronology/19941995.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=337411

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:06, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Several marriages
The "marriage" section only mentions the last marriage of Arafat, skipping previous relationships.

The following article lists two previous wives: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/12/09/for-arafat-tidings-from-two-wives/a2518c4e-0db6-49e5-a4b4-fa3835cd155d/?utm_term=.05986482fef0

There might be another wife in his past: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/wrh/conversations/topics/16834

-- Gabi S. (talk) 14:02, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Yasser Arafat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120229043817/http://www.passia.org/Arafat/Arafat.pdf to http://www.passia.org/Arafat/Arafat.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151208123439/http://news.sky.com/story/211601/mid-east-on-edge-of-abyss-arafat-aide to http://news.sky.com/story/211601/mid-east-on-edge-of-abyss-arafat-aide
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930015507/http://www.tqnyc.org/NYC052021/Government/GovernmentPage.html to http://www.tqnyc.org/NYC052021/Government/GovernmentPage.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120229043817/http://www.passia.org/Arafat/Arafat.pdf to http://www.passia.org/Arafat/Arafat.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:50, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Yasser Arafat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402172134/http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=arNczoMikRug to https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=arNczoMikRug

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:41, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

reference 82 is a dead link- here an updated link http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MFADocuments/Yearbook7/Pages/92%20Press%20Conference%20Following%20Israel%20Air%20Force%20Att.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.221.55.162 (talk) 18:59, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Date of birth?
His date of birth is given as August 24th 1929 in the article but the inscription on his tombstone clearly reads "1929/8/4" so that would be August 4th 1929. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:C6:B725:AC00:3072:5F89:355A:BB3C (talk) 16:41, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hrmph. Yes - you are right about the tombstone. And it seems there are sources for 24th - e.g. and for 4th - e.g. . Icewhiz (talk) 17:24, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Seems Arafat and his family claimed one thing - 4th - and the birth certificate states 24th. Icewhiz (talk) 17:29, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 August 2019
Add category: Category: Arab nationalists Scarsdale.vibe (talk) 07:45, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: There is already Category:Palestinian Arab nationalists. Alduin2000 (talk) 18:43, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

The information about marriage is misleading on Arafat's page, but it's neutral and informative on Suha's page.
Arafat's page says: "During their marriage, Suha tried to leave Arafat on many occasions, but he forbade it.[23] Suha said she regrets the marriage, and given the choice again would not repeat it.[23][24]"

The reader can only imagine why she wanted to leave him, e.g., perhaps because he was treating her badly, limited her freedoms, and she didn't love him. However, this is very misleading.

Source materials and Suha's page explain why she wanted to leave by adding just a few more crucial words: "During her marriage, she tried to leave Arafat on many occasions to escape the gossip aimed at her, but was not permitted to.[13] In interviews after her late husband's death on 11 November 2004, Suha has stated she loved the Palestinian leader but views her marriage to Arafat as a mistake, due to her becoming a political target."

The framing on Arafat's page does not look neutral, because it omits crucial information and reveals only the information that puts him in a bad light. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Przemyslslaw (talk • contribs) 20:36, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect Spelling of Money
Under the subject 'Financial Dealings', the 4 line has the word "Monies". Somebody with sufficient editing privileges please change it. Abmangr (talk) 21:48, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 June 2020
Please change "Arafat established a Palestinian police force, named the Preventive Security Service (PSS), that became active on 13 May." to "Arafat established a Palestinian police force, named the Preventive Security Service (PSS), that became active on 13 May 1994." to improve clarity. Pedipalped (talk) 23:24, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:36, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

"Eradicate"
What the charter says, according to one translation, is eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence. The phrasing eradication of Israel goes beyond that. It also calls for the liberation of Palestine, but for some reason that phrasing is left out. Wonder what the reason is.  nableezy  - 01:17, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Given the lack of response, and given this is not an article on the Fatah charter, I am changing it back.  nableezy  - 13:43, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Coward ;) Arminden (talk) 19:33, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Im sorry, what?  nableezy  - 00:43, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Edit Request: Grammatical Error (Singular/Plural Disagreement)
The discussion of possible poisoning has a disagreement between the use of "a" and "experts" in the following sentence "Tests carried out by a Swiss scientific experts found traces of polonium in quantities much higher than could occur naturally on Arafat's personal belongings."

It is either a group of experts ("Swiss experts" plural being correct then as is, but the preceding "a" earlier in the sentence should be removed) or a singular expert (in which case "Swiss experts" should be Swiss expert" and the preceding "a" should be retained).

I do not have sufficient edit history to fix this due to the arbitration, otherwise I would, someone with privileges, please humor my grammatical mishigas.

Basit.mustafa (talk) 17:32, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Yasser Arafat as a terrorist leader
The opening summary should have an indication that Yasser Arafat is considered by many Israelis and people around the world as a terrorist. Mrakawie (talk) 08:19, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I think the above edit needs more substantiation to qualify as encyclopedic content. Specifically, making this assertion into verifiable content would help. Without citations from international justice organizations, etc, this seems to be speculative and unsubstantiated editorialization that while perhaps true or not (I will not jump into that firefight!), is not appropriate for Wikipedia. Perhaps you could suggest citations from authorities or published objective work that substantiates this assertion with research, data, and/or formal charges and this could then be a worthy addition. For example, in the article about Osama bin Laden, in discussing his status as a terrorist, the article discusses his affiliation as a leader of an organization recognized by several IGOs/NGOs as terrorist organizations ("The group is designated as a terrorist group by the United Nations Security Council, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the European Union, and various countries."). Basit.mustafa (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, in 1987, the United States designated the PLO and its leader (Yasser Arafat, at the time) to be terrorists. That's not still the case, but it is a citation that could be used, though with the clarifying context that it is no longer designated a terrorist organization, and that it had been removed from being considered terrorist long before Arafat died. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 18:58, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2021
In section "Illness and Death", the following sentence should be updated:

Arafat's movements in Lebanon to kill him because Sharon saw Arafat as a "Jew murderer" and an important symbol, symbols being as important as body counts in a war against a terrorist organization.

I suggest removing the statement "symbols being as important as body counts in a war against a terrorist organization", as it adds nothing to the article and is controversial. 147.219.128.202 (talk) 23:28, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The statement is paraphrased from the cited source. Here's the original: "Sharon believed that in a war against a terrorist organization, symbols were as important as body counts." – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Edit Request

 * Specific text to be added or removed: [ Category:Palestinian people of Egyptian descent ]
 * References supporting change:


 * 2C0F:FC89:8015:B1E5:2:1:F5DF:5250 (talk) 14:52, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

✅ --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 20:21, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:44, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Gaddafi with Yasser arafat 1977.jpg

Edit request again
The full name in the preamble doesn't seem to contain "Arafat" part... Whereas it should be there, right before "al-Qudwa". Вечный подмастерье (talk) 17:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ Thepharoah17 (talk) 12:12, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

The 1967 War
The war is mentioned in this article as having been started by Israel. This is incorrect. Persident Nasser closed the Tiran straites prior to the war. This is considered "casus belus" (cause for war) in international law. Israel did attack the Egyptian Air Force as a pre-emptive strike. Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39960461 Note: I am adding this here because I see tha this is a protected page and I don't think I am allowed to do direct edits. Nevertheless, having lived through this war, I know that Nasser asked the UN Troops to leave Sinai and closed the Tiran straites, and it is documented that he intended to go to war.Sensei2004 (talk) 13:11, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Providing a casus belli (a legal justification) for a war is not the same thing as starting one. A pre-emptive strike, meanwhile, very much is an act of war. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:26, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

captions for the video of Arafat speaking
There should be captions made translating what he's saying to allow readers to know what he's talking about. 2A00:A040:198:EEAB:88B7:79C5:164C:52EF (talk) 02:52, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Polonium is not an isotope
Request changing

"after the French report found traces of the radioactive isotope polonium"

to:

"after the French report found traces of polonium"

This is sufficient as all isotopes of polonium are radioactive. 2A02:8071:184:4E80:0:0:0:27C2 (talk) 06:55, 13 September 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zerotalk 11:27, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

personal life requires further edition
I believe there was a lack of context onto why would Suha, the wife, say she regrets the marriage. The same articles that are referenced in this page have valid context, but they were somehow not included by previous editors. For example, I will copy here:

--- “Even if I have regrets I accept the reality. Arafat was a great leader and I was very lonely in my marriage. I was always on the defensive because of the rumors that they spread about me. But life without him is even harder.”

“If I could turn back time I wouldn’t marry Arafat,” she added.

Arafat was a strong supporter of the decision to exhume her husband in November 2012 amid claims he was poisoned. --

I hope someone with proper edit rights can include the adequate context. Sebschuth (talk) 16:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 October 2023
Remove AIDS as a leading theory of Arafat's dead as there is absolutely no evidence to support this hypothesis. Juanfibarra (talk) 22:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's just a theory (likely baseless), but since its sourced and not stated as a fact, it cannot be deleted through an edit request. I suggest you start a discussion about it in order to seek consensus for its removal. M.Bitton (talk) 19:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Legacy Section Needs Expanding
The legacy section lists only things named after him, when it should expand on the final paragraph of the introduction. It should talk about how he is viewed by Israelis, Palestinians and elsewhere, and the impact that people believe he has had on Palestine, Israel-Palestine relations, his enduring influence etc. 121.45.248.167 (talk) 10:15, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Full name
I do not speak Arabic but محمد ياسر عبد الرحمن عبد الرؤوف عرفات القدوة الحسيني reads to me as "Mohammed Yasser Rahman Abdel Raouf Arafat al-Qudwa al-Husseini", not "Mohammed Abdel Rahman Abdel ..." as currently stated in the article. Could someone verify whether there is a mistake in Arabic or in English? Upwinxp (talk) 14:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Location of death
Part of the article reads as if Arafat died in Palestine, whereas evidence shows he fell into coma and died in France:

"...after effectively being confined within his Ramallah compound for over two years by the Israeli army, Arafat fell into a coma and died."

Plenty of information on this in "Death of Yasser Arafat".

Could somebody with enough edit power please correct this line and expand the details? Trickily (talk) 09:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 November 2023
Arafats history is incomplete. Why would you omit his well documented history of terrorism?

https://www.camera.org/article/yasir-arafat-s-timeline-of-terror/ 73.55.241.101 (talk) 01:28, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * CAMERA is an unreliable source, much of this is not relevant to Arafat, and that was a copyright violation.  nableezy  - 01:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

NPOV problem with this
"Sharon saw Arafat as a "Jew murderer" and an important symbol, symbols being as important as body counts in a war against a terrorist organization.Bold text Who's making this claim? It calls the PLO a terrorist organization, which is a contested point of view. 76.14.125.159 (talk) 06:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The entire passage is based on the NYT piece at the paragraph end. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:38, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Footnote 139 is from a depreciated source; is there an alternative? Or should I remove it?
admin (14 September 2003). "Gush Shalom activist Uri Avnery to act as human shield for Arafat". The Electronic Intifada. Retrieved 12 February 2023. is from https://electronicintifada.net/, which is deprecated per RFC: Electronic Intifada. I looked at both this and the other source linked next to it, but couldn’t find a WP:RS for the claims. Does someone have one, or does both source and the sources content have to be removed? FortunateSons (talk) 19:39, 9 January 2024 (UTC)